Black Cannabis 9th Circuit Appeal Exposes #WSLCB Racism and Ruination of Medical Cannabis in Washington

END CANNABIS OPPRESSION
AGAINST MEDICAL AND BLACK PROVIDERS
Current WSLB Director Rick Garza, Jim Vollendroff, Ollie Garrett, Chair David Postman
Smiling faces tell lies: Others have harmed more but they continue the Grand Tradition
Rick Garza has been employed in a power position with LCB/WSLCB for twenty-five (25) years.
In his tenure as Director the WSLCB disfranchised most medical cannabis providers and *ALL* Black
medical cannabis providers. This follows history of WSLCB and the City of Seattle enforcing racist policy
that the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals recognized in RK Ventures v. City of Seattle, 307 F.3d 1045, 1058
(9th Cir. 2002).
As a result of the WSLCB there are now ZERO Black-owned recreational stores in Seattle out of 50. This
Agency was warned a decade ago that i502 would result in this situation. They knew it again when
SB5052 was used to kick out the medical providers.
Today the WSLCB and its cronies selectively decide who will get to play in the game. Some of them even
stole the name and goodwill of Black Excellence in Cannabis to do so in the so-called “Equity”
movement. There is no Equity. Cannabis Attorney Michael S. Reid filed a Sworn Declaration that
WSLCB’s policies harmed Blacks more than whites; no Blacks got licenses after the i502 “lottery” that
NAACP Economic Chair Darrell Powell labeled “a sham” before the NAACP and ACLU then actually
ignored us in favor of WSLCB cronies. These cronies Peter Manning and Mike Asai then stole the Black
Excellence in Cannabis name & goodwill from Aaron Barfield, and also many other True Stories to tell.
PENDING LAWSUITS THAT THE MEDIA WILL NOT ADDRESS

Shelton and Saad v. WSLCB et al. https://tinyurl.com/3e78969r
King v. Black Excellence: https://tinyurl.com/mry7hafv
Read More at Change.Org: https://tinyurl.com/34skpzx6

No. 22-35647

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

JAMES K. SHELTON, BEN SHELTON III AND SAMI SAAD

Plaintiffs-Appellants,

v.

LIQUOR AND CANNABIS BOARD
OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON ET AL.,

Defendants-Appellees.

SUPPLEMENTAL APPENDICES
TO REPLY BRIEF OF PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS
22-217896-5 SEA

On Appeal from the United States District Court
Western District of Washington
No. C22-5135 BHS

_________________________
James Kevin Shelton et al.
22832 26th Ave S.
Des Moines WA 98198

APPELLANTS PRO SE

1
NOW COME PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS to respectfully note that
almost immediately after their Reply Brief was due and filed Appellee
WSLCB appeared and provided yet another stall delay on basic
documents that are germane to this case: The follow-up on the
correspondence between Kevin and Ben Shelton and the WSLCB,
specifically one Ollie Garrett. What follows at Appendix A is the initial
request tendered way back on MAY 3, 2022 followed by yet another
stall this week, or nine (9) months LATER. These results speak for
themselves and they indicate a coverup of the little racketeering game
that they are playing.
Not only that, the inquires made by Mr. King regarding the Internal
Affairs investigation that noted Due Process and Constitutional
violations and the requests on pending litigation and communications
with Paula Sardinas have also fell on deaf ears, see Appendices B and C.
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I served a true and accurate copy of this Appendix
was sent to:
Jessica Leiser, WSBA# 49349

Ghazal Sharifi, WSBA# 47750
Assistant City Attorney
[email protected]
[email protected]

Leah E. Harris, WSBA# 40815
Jonathan E. Pitel, WSBA# 47516
Assistant Attorney General
1125 Washington St. SE
Olympia, WA 988504-0110
[email protected]
[email protected]

On this 12th Day of February, 2023
_________________________________
James Kevin Shelton
3

APPENDIX A
From: Christopher King <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 3, 2022 1:09 PM
To: LCB DL Publicrecords (LIQ) <[email protected]>
Good Day to All:

Directed to WSLCB and Ollie Garrett relative to the Certified Mailing
received at 10:09am by WSLCB on July 8, 2020. Attached please find:

a) the prior Affidavit with the letter from Lifetree to Ollie Garrett and
hellfire and brimstone letter from NAACP area President Gerald Hankerson,
who did then fail to respond to Mr. Shelton's NAACP Discrimination
Complaint. Also a screen shot of said letter.

b) the email chronology directing Plaintiff Shelton to contact Ollie Garrett

c) the USPS mail tracking showing delivery of a package from Plaintiff
Shelton

d) a screen shot of the Shelton/Lifetree Discrimination complaint that
NAACP completely IGNORED.

WHEREFORE since I have to do the work that other press won't do, let's get
on down to brass tacks.
One
Produce a copy of each and every correspondence received by WSLCB
Board Member Ollie Garrett from Lifetree, Ben Shelton or Kevin Shelton
pertaining to cannabis and/or social equity between 1 January, 2020 and 1
May, 2022. This means emails, phone messages, U.S. or any other postal
mailings, text messages, ANYTHING and EVERYTHING.

Two
Produce a copy of each and every correspondence issued by WSLCB Board
Member Ollie Garrett to Lifetree, Ben Shelton or Kevin Shelton pertaining to
cannabis and/or social equity between 1 January, 2020 and 1 May, 2022.
This means emails, phone messages, U.S. or any other postal mailings, text
messages, ANYTHING and EVERYTHING.
4

Three
Provide a copy of any and all communications from Board Member Ollie
Garrett to anyone pertaining to the attached letter from Lifetree and the
Sheltons seen at Appendix A. ANYTHING and EVERYTHING.

********
Four
Produce a copy of each and every correspondence received by WSLCB from
Lifetree, Ben Shelton or Kevin Shelton pertaining to cannabis and/or social
equity between 1 January, 2020 and 1 May, 2022. This means emails, phone
messages, U.S. or any other postal mailings, text messages, ANYTHING and
EVERYTHING.

Five
Produce a copy of each and every correspondence issued by WSLCB to
EVERYTHING.

Six
Provide a copy of any and all internal and external WSLCB communications
pertaining to the attached letter from Lifetree and the Sheltons seen at
Appendix A. ANYTHING and EVERYTHING.

Kind Regards,
Christopher King, J.D.
617.543.8085m

5

**************
From: "Norton, Melissa K (LCB)" <[email protected]>
Subject: WSLCB PRR 22-05-040
Date: Feb 9, 2023 at 9:26 PM
To: "[email protected]" [email protected]

Dear Christopher King:

This letter further responds to your public records request. The
Washington State Liquor and Cannabis Board (WSLCB) received the
enclosed public records request from you on May 3, 2022. The WSLCB last
wrote to you about your request on June 7, 2022.

WSLCB estimated needing until July 15, 2022 to complete the response to
this request. Responding is taking longer than anticipated and we need
additional time to process your request and to locate, review, and produce
available records. We have conducted the email searches and are reviewing
them now, we need to extend our response until February 24, 2023.

If you have received sufficient materials at any stage that complete your
need as set forth in your request, please feel free to advise us of that
development as it will free staff time to address other public record
requests received by the agency.
We will contact you again when the records are ready. If you have
questions, please feel free to contact me. Thank you.

Sincerely,

Missy Norton
Records Officer/Public Records Supervisor
Washington State Liquor and Cannabis Board
1025 Union Ave SE Olympia, WA 98501
360-664-1693
[email protected]

Please let us know how we are doing by responding to this 3 question
customer service survey - Public Records Customer Survey. Please send
any questions to [email protected]
6

***************
From: Norton, Melissa K (LCB)
Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2022 2:34 PM
To: Christopher King <[email protected]>
Subject: WSLCB PRR 22-05-040 1st installment


This letter further responds to your public records request. The Washington
State Liquor and Cannabis Board (WSLCB) received your request on May 3,
2022. We last wrote to you regarding your request on June 7, 2022.

Please accept this as your 1st installment of records. In response, in part, to
number 4 of your request seen below, we have located what we believe is
the certified letter you have been seeking. We compared the tracking
number on the letter we located to the number you provided in screen print
in this email chain, and they match. We are providing you with copies of the
3 emails that have this letter attached. These emails are available for you
attached to this correspondence.

No records were withheld redacted or withheld. If these records are not
what you intended when you submitted this request please provide
additional clarification on the records you are seeking.

This mailing completes our response to your 1st installment. We estimate
we will be able to provide you with a 2nd installment in 25 business days or
August 25, 2022.

If you have any questions, please contact me.

Thank you,

Missy Norton
7
360-664-1693
[email protected]


**************

From: Holmes, Erinn (LCB)
Sent: Tuesday, June 7, 2022 10:11 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: WSLCB PRR 22-05-040 Extension


Thank you for your emails regarding your request, seen below.

Washington State Liquor and Cannabis Board (WSLCB) received the public
records request seen below from you on May 3, 2022. The WSLCB last
wrote to you about your request on May 9, 2022.

WSLCB estimated needing until June 7, 2022, to provide you with your
records responsive to this request. Please note that we have had 3 public
records staff leave the agency, their departure has put us behind. We are
currently processing 433 public records requests. We are diligently
working on all cases.

We need to extend the time to make your records available to you until July
15, 2022. Should records become available before that date we will provide
them to you at that time.


Sincerely,
8

Missy Norton
360-664-1693
[email protected]


**************

Sent: Monday, May 9, 2022 8:53 PM
Subject: WSLCB PRR 22-05-040 5 day


The Washington State Liquor and Cannabis Board (WSLCB) received the
public records request seen below from you on May 3, 2022. This letter
responds to your request under RCW 42.56.520 and WAC 314-60-085.
Please use the above Request ID# when contacting us about this request.

You asked for copies of the following records: “One
Produce a copy of each and every correspondence received by WSLCB
Board Member Ollie Garrett from Lifetree, Ben Shelton or Kevin Shelton
pertaining to cannabis and/or social equity between 1 January, 2020 and 1
May, 2022. This means emails, phone messages, U.S. or any other postal
mailings, text messages, ANYTHING and EVERYTHING.

Two
Produce a copy of each and every correspondence issued by WSLCB Board
Member Ollie Garrett to Lifetree, Ben Shelton or Kevin Shelton pertaining to
cannabis and/or social equity between 1 January, 2020 and 1 May, 2022.
9
This means emails, phone messages, U.S. or any other postal mailings, text
messages, ANYTHING and EVERYTHING.

Three
Provide a copy of any and all communications from Board Member Ollie
Garrett to anyone pertaining to the attached letter from Lifetree and the
Sheltons seen at Appendix A. ANYTHING and EVERYTHING.

********
Four
Produce a copy of each and every correspondence received by WSLCB from
EVERYTHING.

Five
Produce a copy of each and every correspondence issued by WSLCB to
EVERYTHING.

Six
Provide a copy of any and all internal and external WSLCB communications
pertaining to the attached letter from Lifetree and the Sheltons seen at
Appendix A. ANYTHING and EVERYTHING.”

We understand your request to be seeking the following:

1. All records received by the WSLCB Board Member Ollie Garrett
from Lifetree, Ben Shelton or Kevin Shelton regarding cannabis
and/or social equity between January 1, 2020 and May 1, 2022.
2. All records issued by WSLCB Board Member Ollie Garrett to
Lifetree, Ben Shelton or Keven Shelton regarding cannabis and /or
social equity between January 1, 2020 and May 1, 2022.
3. All communications from Board Member Ollie Garrett to anyone
regarding the attached letter “Shelton and NAACP letter to WSLCB
and Ollie Garrett”
10
4. All correspondences received by the WSLCB from Lifetree, Ben
Shelton or Keven Shelton regarding cannabis and/or social equity
between January 1, 2020 and May 1, 2022.
5. All correspondences issued by WSLCB to Lifetree, Ben Shelton or
Keven Shelton regarding cannabis and/or social equity between
January 1, 2020 and May 1, 2022.
6. All internal and external WSLCB communications pertaining to the
attached letter from Lifetree and the Shelton’s “Shelton and NAACP
letter to WSLCB and Ollie Garrett”.

If you feel that we have not understood your needs as set forth in your
request, please make us aware of that development, and provide us with
sufficient clarification to allow us to better understand the specific LCB
public records being sought.

We will need to provide you records in several installments. We estimate it
will take up to 20 business days or until about, June 7, 2022, to locate,
gather, review, and copy any available records to provide you with your
1st installment of records.

We always recommend that in the future you forward records requests to
our general request email [email protected] rather than any
individual staff to ensure proper tracking, timely processing, and to avoid
unintentional delays in processing your request.

Please contact me with any questions regarding this matter. Thank you

Sincerely,

Missy Norton
360-664-1693
[email protected]

11

APPENDIX B

Sent: Saturday, April 30, 2022 9:10 AM
To: LCB DL Publicrecords (LIQ) <[email protected]>

Good Day to All,

This Demand is direct to WSLCB only from the superb Miller-Nash/Cornell
work:
https://www.scribd.com/document/554489396/Cornell-Turbulent-
History-of-Cannabis-Regulatory-Enforcement-in-Washington-State-Final-
7121

Please provide, in their unabridged entirety, the reports indicated in red
below. Thank you.

******************
The LCB is recognized as a limited law enforcement agency under state law,
and as such, Enforcement’s authority is limited to the detection and
apprehension of violators only in the subject areas for which the agency is
responsible.62 But in the authors’ experience, Enforcement officers have a
history of attempting to extend their reach and influence beyond their
statutory authority as limited-authority officers, going so far as to threaten
criminal penalties against licensees or their employees.
Although many licensees, fearing retaliation, are reluctant to file complaints
against LCB Enforcement officers, those that do have often resulted in
findings that the officer violated his or her professional obligations.63 The
LCB’s 2018 Internal Affairs investigation unit marked as “substantiated”
forty-two percent of all complaints filed against LCB officers.64 A 2019
report on enforcement investigation outcomes by internal affairs recorded
as “substantiated” claims against officers for insubordination,
professionalism, truthfulness, ethics, and abuse of authority.65 In short, the
agency, and in particular Enforcement, has a substantiated reputation for
engaging in abusive conduct toward licensees.
Actions such as these have led to an acknowledged culture problem at the
LCB; a problem that has been documented in congressional testimony and
12
the HH investigation.66 The following sections document many of the ways
the agency has overreached in its regulatory activities.
1. The LCB’s “Gotcha” Culture Results in Overly Harsh Enforcement……..
64 Samuel J. Young, 2018 IA Report (Feb. 1, 2019).
65 Samuel J. Young, Enforcement Investigations Outcomes (2017−19)
(May 10, 2019).

13
***********

Subject: WSLCB PRR 22-05-027 extension
Date: Feb 9, 2023 at 9:49 PM
To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>


enclosed public records request from you on May 2, 2022. The WSLCB last
wrote to you about your request on May 3, 2022.

available records. We need to extend our response until March 8, 2023.


Sincerely,

Missy Norton
360-664-1693
[email protected]

14
*************

Subject: WSLCB PRR 22-05-027 1st installment


This letter further responds to your public records request. The Washington
State Liquor and Cannabis Board (WSLCB) received your request on May 2,
2022. We last wrote to you regarding your request on May 9, 2022.

Today, we are happy to provide you with your 1st installment of records to
include 2 reports, “Enforcement Investigations & Outcomes (2017-19)” and
”2018 IA Report”.

These records are available for you to attached to this email. No public
records were redacted or withheld.

Please note that we originally understood you to be seeking those 2 reports,
we now understand you to be seeking “I need the investigative files relative
to the substantiated claims contemplated by Fn 64 and Fn 65” as stated in
your email seen below on May 18, 2022.

This mailing completes our response to your 1st installment of records. We
estimate it will take up to 30 business days or until about, July 7, 2022, to
locate, gather, review, and copy any available records, and provide you with
a 2nd installment of records.



Sincerely,

15

Missy Norton
360-664-1693
[email protected]

*************



public records request seen below from you on May 2, 2022. This letter

You asked for copies of the following records: “Please provide, in their
unabridged entirety, the reports indicated in red below. Thank you.

64 Samuel J. Young, 2018 IA Report (Feb. 1, 2019).
65 Samuel J. Young, Enforcement Investigations Outcomes (2017−19)
(May 10, 2019).”

We understand your request to be seeking Reports “64 Samuel J. Young,
2018 IA Report (Feb.1, 2019)” and “65 Samuel J. Young, Enforcement
Investigations Outcomes (2017-19) (May 10, 2019)”. If you feel that we
have not understood your needs as set forth in your request, please make us
16
aware of that development, and provide us with sufficient clarification to
allow us to better understand the specific LCB public records being sought.

We estimate it will take up to 10 business days or until about, May 23, 2022,
to locate, gather, review, and copy any available records.



Sincerely,

Missy Norton
360-664-1693
[email protected]

17
APPENDIX C

Sent: Sunday, June 5, 2022 12:07 PM
To: LCB DL Publicrecords (LIQ) <U-D-LCB-
[email protected]>; [email protected]; suburban5@m
sn.com; [email protected]; [email protected]; Jacob Stone
Vapor Science <[email protected]>; Ben York
<[email protected]>; David Otto
<[email protected]>; [email protected]: RCW
§42.56 Request for Pending Lawsuit Information

External Email
Hey Kevin,

Different Coast same nonsense. I’ll give you a holler brotha!

************

Good Day to All,

This is both the WSLCB and the Office of the State Attorney General; each
request is to be treated individually lest WSLCB continue on its
calculated path of dilatory responses to reasonable straightforward
inquiry. You will note removal of Messrs. Gil and Williams from the chain
as they are no longer with WSLCB although I always keep Jenny Durkan’s
former email in this mix because she was at the helm of this dirty vessel for
years.

1. Provide any and all spreadsheets, internal reports or any other
documents indicating the number of all pending lawsuits relating to equity
cannabis licensing as of May 1, 2022.

2. ProProvide any and all spreadsheets, internal reports or any other
documents indicating the case number and jurisdiction of all pending
lawsuits relating to equity cannabis licensing as of May 1, 2022.
18

documents indicating the number of all pending lawsuits relating to any

lawsuits relating to any cannabis licensing as of May 1, 2022.

5. A copy of any and all correspondence between anyone and everyone at
WSLCB and Paula Sardinas from 1 Jan 2018 to present.

Thank you. Please respond in Good Faith and in the time permitted by law,
as opposed to whenever you feel like it, as noted in the video below and
other correspondence I’ve sent to you. You see, whether or not you and
your lawyers like it I expose a lot of corruption and often change the course
of history, such as in New Hampshire where I was falsely accused of a crime
and then went on to stop a roadway from being named after an abusive cop:
https://kingcast955.wixsite.com/circle-of-stones
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MPlBpPsuN44

And was interviewed by then Representative and current SENATOR Kevin
Avard:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DLQywsmcX2M&t

And oh, note in the second video regarding failed Bruce McKay Highway I’m
busy evoking Greek Mythology all the while the Chair of the committee is
busy applying different standards to me versus other speakers. Y’all try to
do the same crap out here and I stand just as resolute against any and all of
your nonsense; you can just chuck it straight into the garbage.

Best regards,
Christopher King, J.D.
19
**************

Subject: WSLCB PRR 22-06-042 extension
Date: Feb 9, 2023 at 9:53 PM


enclosed public records request from you on June 6, 2022. The WSLCB last
wrote to you about your request on June 13, 2022.

available records. We have conducted the email searches and are reviewing
them now, we need to extend our response until March 8, 2023.



Sincerely,

Missy Norton
360-664-1693
[email protected]

20
************

Sent: Monday, June 13, 2022 11:50 AM


public records request seen below from you on June 6, 2022. This letter

You asked for copies of the following records: “1. Provide any and all
spreadsheets, internal reports or any other documents indicating the
number of all pending lawsuits relating to equity cannabis licensing as of
May 1, 2022.

2. ProProvide any and all spreadsheets, internal reports or any other
lawsuits relating to equity cannabis licensing as of May 1, 2022.

documents indicating the number of all pending lawsuits relating to any

lawsuits relating to any cannabis licensing as of May 1, 2022.

5. A copy of any and all correspondence between anyone and everyone at
WSLCB and Paula Sardinas from 1 Jan 2018 to present.”

We understand your request to be seeking records showing all pending
lawsuits related to equity in Cannabis Licensing as of May 1, 2022. All
records showing all pending lawsuits to including case number and
jurisdiction related to equity in Cannabis Licensing as of May 1, 2022. All
records showing all pending lawsuits related to Cannabis Licensing as of
21
May 1, 2022. All records showing all pending lawsuits to include case
number and jurisdiction relating to Cannabis Licensing as of May 1,
2022. All correspondences between WSLCB and Paula Sardinas from
January 1, 2018 to June 6, 2022. If you feel that we have not understood
your needs as set forth in your request, please make us aware of that
development, and provide us with sufficient clarification to allow us to
better understand the specific LCB public records being sought.

We estimate it will take up to 30 business days or until about, July 27, 2022,
to locate, gather, review, copy any available records, and provide you with a
1st installment of records.



Sincerely,

Missy Norton
360-664-1693
[email protected]

22
No. 22-35647
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
JAMES K. SHELTON, BEN SHELTON III AND SAMI SAAD
Plaintiffs-Appellants,
v.
LIQUOR AND CANNABIS BOARD

OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON ET AL.,
Defendants-Appellees.
REPLY BRIEF OF PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS

22-217896-5 SEA
On Appeal from the United States District Court

Western District of Washington
No. C22-5135 BHS
_________________________
James Kevin Shelton et al.
22832 26th Ave S.
Des Moines WA 98198
APPELLANTS PRO SE
1
NOW COME PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS to respectfully note that
the Appellees have not directly addressed any of Appellants’ primary points
of law and argument. To wit:
1. Appellee Argument Summary:
Appellees claim that the individuals involved are protected by
Qualified Immunity and that the Statute of Limitations eclipses all Claims,
and that Appellants abandoned their life-long Hopes and Dreams. This is so
ludicrous as to defy comprehension; it is a legal and factual fiction set forth
by the same Lower Court that falsely claimed that Appellant Saad didn’t
even file for an i502 license.
Conspicuous by absence is any real substantive analysis, case law or
argument that actually goes to the core of the case, including the major
factors seen below.
2. Appellant Argument Summary:1
A. The Statute of Limitations did not Run Owing to SB5052 Ongoing
Nondelegable Mandate and RK Ventures, Inc. v. City of Seattle,
307 F.3d 1045, 1058 (9th Cir. 2002).
First of all, as previously noted, there is no credence to the Defense that

SB5052 carried some sort of finite end. To assume that is to assume that the
Legislature intended an absurd result, i.e. the Statue gets an indefinite pass
on the clear mandate. The first rule of Statutory Construction however, is
that the Legislature did not intend an absurd result, but then again the
position that all of the Blacks are in – 4 out of 556 licensees in the entire
State are Black – is absurd.

1 There is a lot of overlap between the Assignments of Error. For the sake of easy reading please
apply every point made from the preceding section to the next because it is cumulative.
2
And same with many many cooperatives and other as well, just not as
bad as with Blacks AS NOTED BY ATTORNEY DECLARATION of
Michael S. Reid, the Attorney who opened more medical cannabis
dispensaries than any other. Previously-filed.
Again:
How Washington State Screwed Over Its Medical Marijuana Dispensaries A

Loophole in the Recreational License Application Process Created a Black
Market for Dispensary Employee Pay Stubs and Left Longtime Dispensary
Operators in the Dust
by Tobias Coughlin-Bogue
As a result of SB 5052, which mandated that the medical marijuana market

be folded into the recreational one, the WSLCB was instructed to open a
new round of retail cannabis licensing and "develop a competitive, merit-
based application process that includes, at a minimum, the opportunity for
an applicant to demonstrate experience and qualifications in the marijuana
industry."2
***********

2
Sec. 6. RCW 69.50.331 and 2013 c 3 s 6 are each amended to read as follows:
(1) For the purpose of considering any application for a license to produce, process, or sell marijuana, or for
the renewal of a license to produce, process, or sell marijuana, the state liquor ((control)) and cannabis
board must conduct a comprehensive, fair, and impartial evaluation of the applications timely received.
(a) The state liquor and cannabis board must develop a competitive, merit-based application process that
includes, at a minimum, the opportunity for an applicant to demonstrate experience and qualifications in the
marijuana industry.
3
Next, as noted in Appellant’s first Supplemental Authority RK Ventures
held that discrete acts subsequent to the expiration of Statute is actionable.
Third, appellants contend that the withdrawal of the settlement offer on
December 5 constitutes a discrete act falling within the limitations
period. We agree. This was a separately actionable act on the part of the
City. Rather than being the inevitable consequence of an earlier decision,
this decision was the result of "independent consideration." Knox v.
Davis, 260 F.3d 1009, 1014 (9th Cir. 2001). Appellants have, therefore,
asserted at least one allegedly unconstitutional discrete act falling within
the limitations period.3
The Appellee’s arguments here are completely unavailing. It is what it is.
First, again from Section VI of Appellants’ Opening Brief:
B. The Statute of Limitations has not Run on any Cronyism or

Racketeering Claim because Plaintiffs’ Primary Argument Stems
from Year 2020 Activity and Continues Now with Theft and
Misappropriation of Black Excellence in Cannabis Trade Name.
Again, no specific response from Appellees so these allegations

and arguments must stand, again from Section VI:
“….had the Lower Court been paying attention instead of substituting

its own Judgment it would have seen that the primary racketeering
argument stems from – again – Uncontroverted Declarations,
substantiated by phone records and emails, that show how a set of
WSLCB cronies including Eli Lilly VP and local hob-nobber and
Robber Baron Nate Miles, former Commissioner of African-American
Affairs Paula Sardinas, Chris Bennett, Thomas Williams and WSLCB

3
Interestingly enough, Bradley Bagshaw – husband of perennial City Council Member Sally Bagshaw - -
was lead Counsel for Plaintiffs-Appellants. So the Powers-that-Be are fully aware that this type of unlawful
discriminatory conduct occurs in Western Washington. The Bagshaws themselves however have joined
forces to unlawfully withhold Public Information relative to the City’s failed Income Tax initiative. More
on this in Reply but the Washington Policy Center noted:
“Other public records provided by Seattle were emails between Councilmember Sally Bagshaw and her
husband Bradley Bagshaw directly relating to Seattle’s 2017 effort to impose an income tax. These records,
sent on Bagshaw’s Gmail account, had previously been denied under a claim of “spousal privilege.””

4
Board Member Ollie Garrett cooked up a non-government sponsored
event whereby they would use the Goodwill of my brother and my
store (Greentree Cannabis) to obtain a license, with us surrendering
50% of our company to Nate Miles alone.
It was uncontroverted that this illicit deal fell apart because Williams
demanded one million dollars ($1,000,000.00) “[O]ff the top so [he]
could retire.”6
We wrote:
Two. This filing will further demonstrate that Plaintiffs Complaint and
subsequent filings clearly demonstrate likely Civil Racketeering fact
patterns that must be heard by a Jury (or at a minimum be subject to
Discovery).
Moreover, Plaintiffs have repeatedly demonstrated allegations of

Black cannabis pioneer Aaron Barfield who stated that he had a
force-placed member in his organization who was an embezzler to
the tune of $300,000.00 and subject to adverse Judgments totaling
$400,000.00 from another partner.
Note that the only Black-owned Cannabis facility to obtain any

sort of license in the entire Equity Era involves Jim Buchanan, a
criminal and longtime personal friend/paramour of Ollie
Garrett, the only Black member of the WSLCB. She is a token,
and everyone at the Board quickly jumps at anyone who raises
this legitimate issue as “taking down a good Black Lady.” It is a
pathetic tool of abuse and oppression.9
5
C. The Statute of Limitations is Met with Ongoing Equal Protection
Concerns Amidst Non-Black Compassion Clubs.
First and foremost the Court must review additional and ongoing
information that shows how the previously-mentioned compassion clubs like
Vincere’s and Red Barn continue to operate with impunity even after yet
another raid that was conducted immediately after Appellants and Mr. King
raised the issue publicly at WSLCB meetings. (See Appendix A). 4
The problem continues on as narrated in Appendix A with years of
false promises of crack-downs on compassion clubs like Vincere’s
whereupon it opens right back up doing the exact things that Blacks cannot
do. The last time we checked that is an Equal Protection violation point
blank.
The best that Appellees can do here is to claim that Appellants have
no right to participate in Federally-Criminal activity.
a. Appellants’ constitutional claims must fail, as they have no
federally protected right to engage in federal criminal activity
...........................................................................22
But this fails because the issue is the Substantive and Procedural Due
Process and Equal Protection matters completely overwhelm this matter.
and we know that the State freely allow white others to sell and to distribute
cannabis, pot, marijuana or whatever we want to call it. And this happens in
spite of the extralegal events including unlawful other drugs fireworks and
firearms as recent reviews clearly show at Appendix A.

4 Appellants are aware of the general prohibition on new evidence on Appeal. However this is an
ongoing Equal Protection issue and the newly-discovered documents merely bolster that which was
stated previously. Appellants do not object to a State Surreply as to Appendix A so they can explain it,
and how Defendant Garza allegedly didn’t know about these places even though they had been raided
on prior occasions.
6
It also fails because remember Appellants even showed a municipally-
funded bus bringing patients to Vincere’s despite King County Prosecutor
Dan Satterburg’s pronouncement:
That means only licensed operations can sell pot, he said.
“It’s not fair for those stores that are doing it right and having to
compete with the unlicensed stores that don’t have to pay the 37
percent tax,” Satterberg said. (Id.).
Exactly how this fails the current, ongoing Equal Protection

argument remains to be seen. Furthermore it was an ongoing Equal
Protection argument that went back much further than the 2019 time stated
by the Department of Revenue, which had recently changed information on
its website after this Appeal was filed because they are in on it too and the
whole scheme needs a real and full and honest Federal investigation. See
Appendix A.
Not only that, the Pierce County Ordinance No. 2015-27s, ratified on
January 22, 2016 (Appendix B) says the same thing but the whites and
Asians seem to have carte blanche while the Blacks sit on the sidelines and
anyone who dares to question the WSLCB and its cronies are accused of
trying to “take down a Black woman,” even though said Black woman
(Board Member Ollie Garrett) and the Board have continued to refuse to
provide any response to what happened to the letter that Appellant Shelton
sent them at Juneteenth, 2020. We guess the dog ate the homework. Again.5

5 We have seen some of the people who previously stood strong with us jump ship and now publicly
scorn us and pledge allegiance to Garrett and the WSLCB. It is completely foul. Watch the video
because videos don’t lie… but people do: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W88wNmJQrrc&t
Preview on Nate Miles Baseless Cease and Desist and Empirical Disrespect to Libby Haines
Marchel

7
D. The Lower Court was Completely Wrong Because Appellant Saad
Definitely Applied for an i502 Recreational License.
There’s really nothing more that needs to be said about this. Appellant
Saad has already shown the Lower Court and this Court that he did indeed
file for an Application, and has sworn under Oath that the determination on
him changed in mid-stream while he was on the phone with a WSLCB
person whose identity still remains shielded because WSLCB refused to
provide Appellant Saad’s own file to him for months on end now. It is
patently absurd and patently illegal on so many fronts it just boggles the
mind.
Sadly, this is business as usual in Washington when it comes to the
Appellees and everyone knows it.
8
E. Defendants Garza and Hobbs are Not, Ipso Facto, Entitled to
Qualified Immunity.
Appellees make the argument that Qualified Immunity obtains. With

respect to Appellee Garza that simply cannot be true because there is
evidence that the WSLCB upper brass and local LE had several completely
illegal meetings that violated Washington Public Records Law RCW §42.56.
As noted there were direct uncontroverted statements from the only Black-
owned shop to obtain licenses since 2020 that they have evidence of
collusion against Blacks and traditionally-Black neighborhoods. We also
know that community activist Art West settled his case noted below and
mum’s the Word, but mum’s the Word…. We are entitled to Discovery on
this!
Below on the following page the Court and general public can clearly
see that Peter Manning – part of the only Blacks to actually receive licenses
during the so-called equity era – stated there was proof of collusion between
WSLCB staff and City officials & police officers. This was uncontroverted.
According to Black Excellence in Cannabis’ Peter Manning:
“We have them intentionally putting us out of business. Intentionally

We have documentations of them doing that, we have LCB Officers
that came forth and given affidavits that this was their plan and their
goal, we also have that they paid an individual $192,000.00 to keep
secret that they had went and met with all the police officers of the
south end and Seattle, in the Black areas of the South End or Black
areas of Tacoma, we have evidence of that, before they implemented
i502.”12
This was straight from Mr. Manning’s mouth @2:55 et seq:
9
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hUHPahv9exI&t
Black Excellence in Cannabis Blasts WSLCB & Seattle Cannabis

Racism with Chris King and Friends
103 views
May 25, 2022
Yet the Lower Court claimed that unlawful collusion under 42 USC
§1985 just could never have happened, to wit: “that claim is
implausible.....”
Well not according to the Cornell School of Law and Public Policy
and the highly-esteemed lawyers at Miller-Nash law firm here in Seattle:
https://www.scribd.com/document/554489396/Cornell-Turbulent-History-
of- Cannabis-Regulatory-Enforcement-in-Washington-State-Final-7121
The Turbulent History of Cannabis Regulatory Enforcement in

Washington State
Christine Masse, Daniel J. Oates, Christopher Lynch, Andrew G. Murphy,

Danielle Hunt,Vanessa L. Wheeler & Vanessa Williams-Hall
Cornell Journal of Law and Public Policy Winter 2022
The LCB is recognized as a limited law enforcement agency under state law,
and as such, Enforcement’s authority is limited to the detection and
apprehension of violators only in the subject areas for which the agency is
responsible.62 But in the authors’ experience, Enforcement officers have a
history of attempting to extend their reach and influence beyond their
statutory authority as limited-authority officers, going so far as to threaten
criminal penalties against licensees or their employees.
Next remember area Attorney Douglas Hiatt also knew that there was some
sort of Disparate Impact and Treatment too, and he was quite blunt about it
so we don’t quite understand why if any of us is that blunt that we are
accused of taking down a Good Black Woman. Hiatt said:
10
"Big fuckin' surprise," he said. "They're not going to stop enforcing it
while we litigate it, so I'm filing an injunction."
Hiatt also says the city's law is being applied unevenly and that minority
businesses have received the brunt of the enforcement. "The places that
have actually suffered the raids, those are all minority businesses," he
said. "The ones that we have seen take the most egregious hit are all
minority-owned or they are serving the minority community."
**********
LAW AND ARGUMENT
Lastly, let’s think about the obvious lie that Defendant Garza put forth
to Appellant Kevin: The notion that Mr. Shelton just informed him about
Vincere’s and Red Barn when in point of fact previous “raids” were public
knowledge FOR YEARS.
With that in mind Qualified Immunity is only available to responsible
State staff who don’t lie to constituents about crucial Equal Protection issues
or allow for clandestine meetings with local Law Enforcement so secret that
they pay Art West nearly $200,000.00 to shut his mouth and run off and
brag about his waterfront property he bought.
West now bristles at the notion of having to testify for anyone associated
with us but that is what this Court must make him do, ultimately and here’s
why: Savage v. State 127 Wn.2d 434, 899 P.2d 1270 (WA 1995).
2. Precedent
The Court of Appeals also relied for its holding on a series of cases in
which the immunity of government employees was extended to the
government. Savage v. State, 72 Wn. App. 483, 488-89, 491, 864 P.2d
1009, review granted, 124 Wn.2d 1017 (1994) (citing Creelman v.
Svenning, 67 Wn.2d 882, 410 P.2d 606 (1966)); Plotkin v.
Department of Corrections, 64 Wn. App. 373, 826 P.2d 221, review
denied, 119 Wn.2d 1022 (1992); Lutheran Day Care v. Snohomish
11
County, 119 Wn.2d 91, 829 P.2d 746 (1992), cert. denied, 113 S. Ct.
1044 (1993); Frost v. City of Walla Walla, 106 Wn.2d 669, 724 P.2d
1017 (1986); Guffey v. State, 103 Wn.2d 144, 690 P.2d 1163 (1984).
The appellate court's analysis in this case resembles that recently

rejected by this court in Lutheran. There, we admonished against
conclusory holdings which rely on ostensibly controlling cases while
eschewing the "detailed policy-oriented factual inquiry which ... is
necessary to *441 decide the immunity question." Lutheran, 119
Wn.2d at 100(emphasis added).
That is the precise problem here: The dots are all lined up and these
individual and collective Defendants would fall like Dominoes if subjected
to Discovery; this is why they never provide any information when it really
matters: Sami Saad’s files. Kevin Shelton’s Certified letter to Ollie Garrett
and to the Board. There are many many more but those two core issues, both
in the Equity era in direct attempts to get responses, are as good as any.
It just can’t be any more obvious how these Defendants are just
running from the facts while talking about how good everything is going to
be in the future so why don’t we just go away and forget about all that was
stolen from us. We just cannot accept this. It is legally ethically and morally
aberrant conduct.
And Defendant Garza is responsible for all of this; he is THE
DIRECTOR. Since when did the State of Washington decide that Agency
Directors who operate willfully failed Agencies for years on end are not
accountable for their actions? We missed that part in the legislative
sessions.

12
CONCLUSION
Sometimes pictures are better than words. These two (2) pictures,
showing Appellant Saad’s partial application, and the Kevin Shelton
Certified letter – both recently, in this very Statute of Limitations period --
tell this Court all it needs to know.
13
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I served a true and accurate copy of this Reply Brief
was sent to:
Jessica Leiser, WSBA# 49349

Ghazal Sharifi, WSBA# 47750
Assistant City Attorney
[email protected]
[email protected]
Leah E. Harris, WSBA# 40815

Jonathan E. Pitel, WSBA# 47516
Assistant Attorney General
1125 Washington St. SE
Olympia, WA 988504-0110
[email protected]
[email protected]
On this 24th Day of January, 2023
_________________________________
James Kevin Shelton
14

Black Cannabis 9th Circuit Appeal Exposes #WSLCB Racism and Ruination of Medical Cannabis in Washington

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Black Cannabis 9th Circuit Appeal Exposes #WSLCB Racism and Ruination of Medical Cannabis in Washington

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

END CANNABIS OPPRESSION

AGAINST MEDICAL AND BLACK PROVIDERS

PENDING LAWSUITS THAT THE MEDIA WILL NOT ADDRESS

was sent to:

Jessica Leiser, WSBA# 49349

On this 12th Day of February, 2023

From: "Norton, Melissa K (LCB)" <[email protected]>

From: Norton, Melissa K (LCB)

From: Christopher King <[email protected]>

From: "Norton, Melissa K (LCB)" <[email protected]>

From: Norton, Melissa K (LCB)

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

JAMES K. SHELTON, BEN SHELTON III AND SAMI SAAD

LIQUOR AND CANNABIS BOARD

REPLY BRIEF OF PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS

On Appeal from the United States District Court

First of all, as previously noted, there is no credence to the Defense that

How Washington State Screwed Over Its Medical Marijuana Dispensaries A

As a result of SB 5052, which mandated that the medical marijuana market

The Appellee’s arguments here are completely unavailing. It is what it is.

First, again from Section VI of Appellants’ Opening Brief:

B. The Statute of Limitations has not Run on any Cronyism or

Again, no specific response from Appellees so these allegations

“….had the Lower Court been paying attention instead of substituting

Moreover, Plaintiffs have repeatedly demonstrated allegations of

Note that the only Black-owned Cannabis facility to obtain any

That means only licensed operations can sell pot, he said.

Exactly how this fails the current, ongoing Equal Protection

Appellees make the argument that Qualified Immunity obtains. With

“We have them intentionally putting us out of business. Intentionally

This was straight from Mr. Manning’s mouth @2:55 et seq:

Black Excellence in Cannabis Blasts WSLCB & Seattle Cannabis

The Turbulent History of Cannabis Regulatory Enforcement in

Christine Masse, Daniel J. Oates, Christopher Lynch, Andrew G. Murphy,

Cornell Journal of Law and Public Policy Winter 2022

LAW AND ARGUMENT

The appellate court's analysis in this case resembles that recently

was sent to:

Jessica Leiser, WSBA# 49349

Leah E. Harris, WSBA# 40815

On this 24th Day of January, 2023

You might also like